Your World of Legal Intelligence
 Australia | 1-800-335-6202

Ridgeway v R

Cited authorities 17 Cited in 234 Precedent Map Related
Vincent
JurisdictionAustralia Federal only
Neutral Citation1995-0419 HCA B,[1995] HCA 66
Year1995
Date1995
CourtHigh Court
    • This document is available in original version only for vLex customers

      View this document and try vLex for 7 days
    • TRY VLEX
187 cases
  • Employment Advocate v Williamson
    • Australia
    • Federal Court
    • Invalid date
  • DPP v Cash
    • Ireland
    • High Court
    • 28 March 2007
    ...the one hand and fairness to the accused, on the other, have to be weighed ( Bunning v. Cross (1978) 141 CLR 54; Ridgway v. The Queen (1995) 184 CLR 19); and in New Zealand, while it has long been held that the judicial discretion to exclude unfairly obtained evidence is wider than that rec......
  • The People (Director of Public Prosecutions) v J.C.
    • Ireland
    • Supreme Court
    • 15 April 2015
    ...of crime, on the one hand, and fairness to the accused, on the other, have to be weighed ( Bunning v Cross (1978) 141 CLR 54; Ridgeway v The Queen (1995) 184 CLR 19); and in New Zealand, while it has long been held that the judicial discretion to exclude unfairly obtained evidence is wider ......
  • Synon and Others v Hewitt and Others
    • Ireland
    • High Court
    • 10 November 2006
    ...[2001] UKHL 53; [2001] 1 W.L.R. 2060. R. v. Mack (1988) 44 C.C.C. (3d) 513. Reg. v. Latif [1996] 1 W.L.R. 104. Ridgeway v. The Queen (1995) 184 C.L.R. 19. Sherman v. United States (1958) 356 U.S. 369. Sorrells v. United States (1932) 287 U.S. 435. Taunton Deane Borough Council v. Brice (199......
    • Request a trial to view additional results
16 books & journal articles
  • THE COURT'S DISCRETION TO EXCLUDE EVIDENCE IN CIVIL CASES AND EMERGING IMPLICATIONS IN THE CRIMINAL SPHERE
    • Singapore
    • Singapore Academy of Law Journal No. 2016, December 2016
    • 1 December 2016
    ...377 at [27]. 19 It was not necessary because the High Court ruled that the discretionary power did not apply to disciplinary cases. 20(1995) 184 CLR 19. 21[2001] 1 WLR 2060. 22Law Society of Singapore v Tan Guat Neo Phyllis[2008] 2 SLR(R) 239 at [113]. 23 Which was the case in Ridgeway v R(......
  • Subject Index
    • United Kingdom
    • International Journal of Evidence & Proof, The No. 7-4, December 2003
    • 1 December 2003
    ...v Sanderson PlumbingProducts, Inc., 530 US 133 (2000).........................................................8, 9Ridgeway v R (1995) 184 CLR 19 ........51Ritchie Grocer Co. v Aetna Casualty &Surety Co., 426 F 2d 499 (8th Cir.,1970) ...............................................165Rocheste......
  • Due Process, Judicial Power and Chapter III in the New High Court
    • United Kingdom
    • Federal Law Review No. 32-2, June 2004
    • 1 June 2004
    ...the generalised due process principle: see, eg, Abebe v Commonwealth (1999) 197 CLR 510, 592 and Ebner (2000) 205 CLR 337, 372–3. 70 (1995) 184 CLR 19 ('Ridgeway'). 2004 Chapter III in the New High Court 213 ___________________________________________________________________________________......
  • Prosecutorial Discretion and Judicial Review: An Analysis of Recent Canadian and South African Decisions
    • South Africa
    • Southern African Public Law No. 35-2, July 2020
    • 1 July 2020
    ...79 Per Lord Blackburn, Metropolitan Bank Ltd v Pooley (1885) 10 App Cas. 210 at 220–221. 80 (1999) 198 CLR 380 at 391 para 25. 81 (1995) 184 CLR 19 at 74–75. 82 Wil liams v Spautz (n 53) 509. 83 Oceanic Sun Line Special Shipping Co Inc v Fay (1988) 165 CLR 197 at 242–243, 246–247. 84 Hamilt......
    • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT